Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical Fake book question

david_a, you can argue that with my Jazz teacher. Or with Bill Evans. Or with Dizzie Gillespie. Or even with Keith Jarrett. Whether or not the player has a global (or what we call 'Horizontal') view of the music doesn't change the fact that the scale has changed. This is the whole basis of Bebop and perhaps all of Jazz. I don't know what real life is in your context because it isn't mine. I am completely aware at all times of what notes can be improvised over each particular chord and if I vary from that, I do so intentionally.

Let's debate a particular song if you want. How about one of my favorites, All the Things You Are? What "Key" is it in? Or does it belong in the category of "Weird Changes"?

That's a song where details could certainly be argued one way or another, but here's my rough analysis, calling everything a modulation if at all possible:

Whole intro is in G except last bar modulates to F minor
8 bars in F minor
8 bars in C minor
4 bars in G
4 bars in E with a lovely modulation using G sharp enharmonic with A flat to get back to F minor
and the final 12 bars start in F minor but quickly re-interpreted as A flat major and ending in A flat.



It could easily be argued that some of what I called modulations are actually not.

Well I think right there we're already at a big impasse. To Jazzers, 'All the Things You Are' is an exercise in modulations. You have clearly 'modulated' a fraction of the time I would have. Heck, I modulated multiple times in the first 8 bars alone.

So maybe we should just leave well enough alone. Obviously we are from different Genres and we look at things from a different lens.

But just so you understand where I'm coming from, let's just look at the first 4 bars of ATTYA.

|Fm7 | Bbm7 | Eb7 | AbMaj7 |

For my purposes, I look at this in these keys (obviously I refer to them in my context as modulations):

|Bb | Ab | Ab | Ab Lydian or Eb |

Whether I like it or not, I cannot mix these scales in these chords if I'm going to improvise on it. Otherwise, I will be left thinking of "avoid" notes all throughout which is very distracting. So in jazz training, we know precisely which notes are applicable to each chord.

Now we jazzers also do a "global" view of this. The global view has to do with common tones. So the visual here is that I look for a musical context (line) that extends to all 4 chords if I can. This is not always possible, such as in complex Jazz tunes like Giant Steps.

So for me the idea of a big picture scale, is there. It is less of scale really than a shape, with "avoid notes" demarcated out. In this first four chords, the "main" key or shape that I would automatically think of is Ab. And the reason is that I'm not in Bb long enough to worry about avoid notes.

Thus for me, the arguments about whether or not to call it a modulation are moot, since I MUST look at the underlying scales and look for some commonality if I can, and sometimes, it doesn't even connect to a key (although typically it's the most commonly used key).

In general, I would say that ATTYA spends a lot of time in the keys of Ab, Eb, and Bb, G and many other short trips to other keys in between (C, Db, Em, E, Cm, etc.). Now understand that this would be the typical Jazz analysis of this.

When we refer to Roman Numerals, we don't just make notations like:

I7 II7 VI7(b9) or such modifications, but we would make analysis in the context of some home key if possible.

Like the first 4 bars of ATTYA could be represented as:

|ii | ii/IV | V/IV | IV |

This is how we do it to accomodate recording modulations but keeping the context of the circle of fifths progressions clear. However, this is not an exercise I would apply to ATTYA as I think it would be unreadable. The reason is that I am at a loss to identify the "Home" key for this tune.

Anyway, I hope I'm just making my view of this clear. Obviously our context dictates what's important. In Jazz, we are arguably 'microscopic' in our analysis. But we have no choice was we have to choose the notes we choose to play. There is nothing written except for the analysis of the structure as I'm showing here.

Jerome Kern was not a jazz player, he was a songwriter. You are a jazz player. It's his song. It's your playing. Your analysis of your own "Coles Notes" of how to improvise on All the Things is absolutely brilliant but it's not an analysis OF THE SONG, and your modulations don't exist in the song - they're imaginary, you made them up. (You DID make them up for a perfectly good reason, but they're still not there in the song.) My analysis likely has serious mistakes in it, and I'd be glad to hear about them, but it's an actual analysis of the song at least, whatever flaws it has.

This is not about context. It's about whether we're analyzing the song itself, or analyzing a special method of figuring out lines while improvising.

Your jazz teacher does not want to erase the basics of music, just add to them. If you are forgetting the basics then that's your own business.

david_a, I can point out so many errors in your statements but what's the point.

You cannot even identify the difference between a minor key and a major key in this tune which Jerome Kern certainly knew about. So any reference of yours to my lack of knowledge of the basics of music is completely out of whack.

I guarantee you that Jerome Kern knew exactly what key he was in at all times BECAUSE THE MELODY PROVES IT.

Do you even know what a ii-V-I is? Do you know the contexts of ii-V-I's in this tune? Is a ii-V-I an "overanalysis"? Do you know the difference between a major ii-V-I and a minor ii-V-i?

I think I get it now. You're afraid of modulations (because it adds complexity), so the answer is to say it doesn't exist so that the music remains "basic". This is of course regardless of the intent of the composer or arranger.

Sigh...I think I'll move on now. It's been fun.

I believe an academic would refer to that as a "tonicization".

From The New Harvard Dictionary of Music:

"Tonicization
The momentary treatment of a pitch other than the tonic as if it were the tonic... The resulting harmony is most likely to be the dominant of the tonicized pitch and is in such a case often termed a secondary or applied dominant... Tonicization, which may be prolonged beyond a single chord or two, is nevertheless a local phenomenon, as distinct from modulation, which implies an actual change in tonic."

And the last sentence, annoyingly enough, confirms that we are indeed arguing semantics:

"The boundary between the two, however, is not always easily fixed in practice."

Oh, man, do I feel like a geek

Circle of fifths? Those are the chords you get if you play a major scale with triads in root inversion. And the 7 would be diminished, not minor.

Why you call this the circle of fifths, I have no clue.

Look it up in any dictionary of musical terms, or just google 'circle of fifths'.

Again, this is all about your little instruction book to yourself of how you want to play the song. Again, it's absolutely brilliant and I don't have the skill to do what you're doing. But you've forgotten what a scale is. Please don't make your kindergarten teacher cry.

This thread is like when you throw a party for your friends...they show up, get drunk and start bickering with each other Ok, we're out of nachos, we ran out of beer, and I have to go to work early in the morning...can we close shop? Thanks. Good night.

Good night. And I hope none of you ever edit your posts so we keep it here for posterity. It will be good reading for everyone studying music. Turning off the lights now.

What just happened here, are we arguing about horizontal (key based) playing vs vertical (chord/scale)?

The traditional jazz pedagogy is looking at each chord and playing the appropriate scale on top.

I prefer a more key based, where you focus on a key and any non-diatonic notes are just treated as a one time thing, unless the song modulates to a different key.

Take My Funny Valentine, it's entirely in the key of C minor, with some verses concentrating on the relative major Eb, but I would consider the whole song just in 1 key.


A tune that does have many changes would be On Green Dolphin Street. The first four bars, if played in Eb, would be Eb maj7, Eb min7, Eb/F, Eb/ E. Now, I would still consider the song in the key of Eb, with alterations. I wouldn't call it "modulation", just using all the variations of Eb (major/minor/ #4, tritone subs)

I find it easier to think key for a song, a melody usually follows one key until it changes.

A modal tune like Dolphin Dance changes key centres every few bars, but when Herbie wrote it, you can still follow which keys at what point in the melody.

Sounds like a mountain from a molehill.

OK. I've come across this before I think. Leaving out for the moment whether even the most dogmatic Berklee graduate would apply the "scale-over-chord" technique (is that the ONLY permissible improvisation tool in Boston, Mass.?) to a passing chord in a folk tune, if he uses "modulation" to mean "using a non-diatonic chord", what's his term for "moving to a new key-centre"?

Jazzwee - Take "All the things you are". Take "Giant Steps". Forget for a moment what inprovisational tools you would use on either. Do you admit a difference between taking a ii-V-I type route to resting places in varying keys (generally referred to as "modulating") and - well, whatever you'd describe "Giant Steps" as doing?
Would you see jazz theory as applicable to "Aura Lee", played in the style under discussion? Did you even check what tune we were discussing before setting off on your jazz theory hobby-horse? :-) Do you see jazz theory as the ONLY way of approaching ALL music?

interesting debate.

I see a big difference between Giant Steps, All the Things you are, or many bebop tune
And My Funny Valentine.

Giant Steps modulates. The Key changes. The tune isn't particularly "in a key", and even lacks a key signature (though one might add one).
"All the things you are" clearly modulates.
That's what makes those tunes difficult (that and tempo).

But to me, My Funny Valentine is, except for the bridge, in C minor. My favorite scale, the harmonic minor, nicely fits the entire A section.

The fact that a tune temporarily gets outside does not mean it modulates, it's just a change of tonic: tonicization. So someone may decide to add chords or scales outside, but the tune stays in the original key.
A turnaround is a good example in my view.
E-7 A7 D-7 G7 to Cmaj
That's clearly in Cmajor to me.

By the same token, you may reharmonize, change up a tune, add passing chords and such, yet the tune is the tune, you can't make it modulate. Well, unless you actually change keys, obviously.


And what about the blues?

In music theory and jazz theory, just because the scales associated with the chords are changing doesn't mean the overall key has necessarily changed nor does it necessarily mean a modulation has occured. Although it frequently is the case.

There is no "key change" or "modulation in the first 8 bars of Girl From Ipanema for example. Of course the scales can change. The Bridge does change key. Same with My Funny Valentine.

All The Things You Are is in Ab for the first 5 bars:

vi ii V I IV, then ii V I in C major, then it's in Eb major for 5 bars with again vi ii V I IV

From The New Harvard Dictionary of Music:

"Tonicization
The momentary treatment of a pitch other than the tonic as if it were the tonic... The resulting harmony is most likely to be the dominant of the tonicized pitch and is in such a case often termed a secondary or applied dominant... Tonicization, which may be prolonged beyond a single chord or two, is nevertheless a local phenomenon, as distinct from modulation, which implies an actual change in tonic."

"The boundary between the two, however, is not always easily fixed in practice."

I don't have the patience to read all the posts, but I agree that E7 here is not a modulation... minor 7 chords can be substituted as V7 chords. On Rhythm changes on C

C A7 D7 G7
C Amin7 Dmin7 G7

They are both in key of C, but I would play different scale depending on which quality I want to bring out (minor or V7). And it all depends on the melody notes and other context of the song too.

Likewise

Ebmin7 Ab Dmin7 G7
Dmin7 Abmin7 Db7 G7

They are both essentially in key of C, the first one is just sidestepping by half-step and the second one is tritone substitution. Passing chords works just like passing notes.

You have to firmly establish yourself in the new key in order to say that you have modulated.. Even , countdown, 25-2.. all those tunes with Coltrane Changes are basically variation of ii-V-I progression.

Dmin7|G7|Cmaj7|Cmaj7
Dmin7 Eb7|Abmaj7 B7|Emaj7 G7|Cmaj7

So technically you are still in key of C but you are tonicizing via major 3rds(key of E and Ab)... at least that's how I would see it.

I don't like the fact that some fake books add these harmony on top of the basic harmony... for a beginner it's hard to figure out which one is essential and which one isn't.

Other example of chords not in the harmony without modulation

Fmaj7 Fmin7|Cmaj7

You would need to play a different scale over Fmin7 but IV-iv-I resolution does not suggest a temporary modulation to key of Eb(ii of Eb)

Lady Bird Ending

Cmaj7 Ebmaj7 Abmaj7 Dbmaj7
Cmaj7 Eb7 Ab7 Db7

Again you would need to use different scale for each chord, but this is essentially a variation of I-vi-ii-V. You are playing tritone substitution of

Cmaj7 A7 Dmin7 G7

It takes a lot for me to actually consider something a modulation..A lot of standards go to the relative major/minor, the IV, or the V, and ii-V of those key but it doesn't really sound like a real modulation, since they are so closely related to the original key. (like Misty, In a Satin Doll, Black Orpheus..etc)

another example is Bach's prelude in C major, which remains in C throughout in my view.
If you have the great book 'metaphors for the musician', Randy's solar system explains each one of those chords and why they stay in the key of C.